" It's not about the salaries, Dave.

Henry Kissinger once said power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.

In addition to the power elected officials have, another factor is the side perks, especially the inside information they get. Members of both parties make fortunes using insider information which, when it comes to trading stocks would put you in jail. Looks no further that Harry Reid and Denny Hastert for examples of how you can get rich on just one or two little land deals.

Too many people go to Washington, from both parties, with the best of intentions only to get sucked up in the greed and corruption that runs rampant in that town.

Far too many people go to Washington with modest means and retire millionaires. Just look at Tom Delay, who went to Washington as a small time termite exterminator and came home a millionaire, and if not for his indictment for his criminal behavior, would still be there wheeling and dealing. And this problem is not limited to the Republicans, the Democratic party has their share of crooks too. I chose Delay because his actions were the most egregious.

You're right about term limits, but the very people who benefit the most from them would be the ones who would have to vote them out, and do you really see that happening?

In 94, after being shut out for years, the House Republicans were going to fix all that ailed with the Federal Government. Among the many ideas they had was the plan to implement term limits, but after getting a taste of real power, they decided that term limits weren't really needed (now that they were in the majority). Remember that? "

" Dave, Dave!!! Cool Down.
WE HAVE TERM LIMITS. Representatives have terms of TWO years, Senators SIX.
All you have to do it VOTE them out!!!!!!
If there's someone you feel is incapable, has betrayed his/her trust -- go to work to campaign AGAINST him/her.
A rule that limits the number of terms often puts out of office some of the most competent people in the Congress. Besides, this is a democracy (yes, I know it's really a republic but few know the difference) and I should have the right to vote for whomever I WANT TO VOTE FOR. "

" YES!!!
Got to stop that "full pension" too.
Approving something like that is an abuse of power and they should be ashamed. "

" Harry Potter, thanks for remininding us of the record of the Republicans. Remember that in the 90's, they had a pollster find the most sought-for items among the citizenry and put together the Contract with America -- and got elected on it. The one I most remember in that document was the promise to PASS A BLANANCED BUDGET AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION, and thereafter Republicans would balance the budget every year.....
As we well remember NO effort was made to pass such an amendment.
And so far as the budget is concerned, note that Bush alone DOUBLED the national debt and left the coutry in a financial crisis. Let me put this in context: George Bush created as much national debt as had accumulated from the time of George Washington up to the beginning of his term.
In the last months of his term, Bush was catatonic, totally unwilling -- and unable -- to face the crisis, hid in the corner and let Paulson and Bernanke take the heat.
And though BUSH was the one who let Wall Street trade as if it were "play money" he made no effort to regulate them, but now every Republican in Congress thinks himself an economics expert and attacks Obama.
I wonder how the folks in Mattoon feel about the bitter attack in a Senate speech last week by Senator Coburn (R=Oklahoma) who bitterly denounced Future Gen, claiming that "the greatest brains in MIT say that it won't work", and declared it a stimulus boondoggle. "

" Time to take another look at term limits: said the angry republican lol "

" there does need to be a limit on the NUMBER of CONSECUTIVE TERMS an elected office......like 2 at the most.

if it's good enough for a president, it's good enough for a senator. "

" Cognitus, I preferred to call it the contract ON America.

I've always thought that particular election was what caused the rift between Limbaugh and Gingrich. As I'm sure you are aware of, there has been an uneasy truce between those two for years. They both wanted credit for the Republican victory of '94 in the House.

Here's a prediction, if Gingrich seriously wants to run for president, I think he needs to break with Limbaugh. Newt knows that no Republican can win the White House with Limbaugh on his side. With Limbaugh, there is no room for compromise, and no party will ever win the White house with a narrow viewpoint such as his. Gingrich is smart enough to know that Limbaugh is really a paper tiger, and his following, while quite vocal, is in reality, a very small part of the Republican party, and you can't win the White House with such a small base as the ultra right wing, represented by Limbaugh.

I have to laugh every time I hear Limbaugh, and the Limbaugh wannabes like Sean Hannity, lament that the reason for the last loss was because McCain wasn't conservative enough. The last election was a backlash aimed at what the voters saw as conservatism, and if the Republicans has indeed ran a true conservative the results would have been worse for them. "

" father bob wrote on Mar 18, 2009 1:06 PM:
" there does need to be a limit on the NUMBER of CONSECUTIVE TERMS an elected office......like 2 at the most.

if it's good enough for a president, it's good enough for a senator. "
---------------------------------
FB
Wasnt sure I would ever get to say this, but on this statement I agree with you 100% "

" Oh this is classic. A big long tirade about Bush and GOP spending with absolutely no mention of the huge spending that is going on right now.

Perfect example of wearing the party blinders. "Massive debt spending is ok, as long as it's MY party. Oh, and this mess is completely the fault of the other party." "

" from the web

The Fed said it would purchase an additional $750 billion worth of government-guaranteed mortgage-backed securities, on top of the $500 billion that it is currently in the process of buying. In addition, the Fed said it would buy up to $300 billion worth of longer-term Treasury securities over the next six months.

All of these measures would come in addition to what has already been an unprecedented expansion of lending by the Fed. Since last September, the central bank has roughly doubled the size of its balance sheet to nearly $2 trillion from $900 billion.

Starting last September, the new lending programs including money for bailouts of individual companies like Citigroup, American International Group and Bank of America have caused the Fed to PRINT NEW MONEY at the fastest pace in history. But much of that money has remained dormant, because the economic downturn has made banks reluctant to lend and businesses and consumers either reluctant or unable to borrow. "

" So if we made things even across the board, we could do away with the two term limit for the whitehouse. We have had several acceptional government figures who served multiple terms well. Paul Simon for one.

Why if an effective leader lands in the whitehouse, or any elected post, should they be forced to be replaced. Its not often a term 3 or more would be an issue. Perhaps if there was no limit, term 2 would not continually be a four year swan song of imposing agendas, that wouldn't stand up to facing re election.

Would the new limits be to any office, or just to the same office? What about appointed or hired government pensioned positions?

We just had an appointment to a higher position, that gave a big increase in set pension benefits day one. Rods pick for department of conservation head, that has already been pulled, but keeps his higher pension plan. What pension plan outside of government is solely based on what you may earn, rather than a set percentage of what you have earned? Were else can you work for 7.5 years and have benefits or set pension pay for life? Where else after being vested, can you hold down a higher job for a few days, and keep benefits of that job for life? The government pension system needs structured properly, and administered effectively. It is currently a complex pyramid scheme that is a huge money pit.

Government funded medical care should be forced to use the VA, like its sodiers get to, not Bethesda. At least then, its not as likely that many of the continually poor conditions would continue in that system. If they had to wait in line, and visit a VA hospital to get their care, the wait and facility would not be what it currently is. Consolidating the care should be more cost effective, to reinvest money saved to fixing those facilities.

Put part of the blame where it belongs. Part of why the 2 party system is broken, is a party will keep on an ineffective incumbant, and the opposition fails to find a better alternative. Blago Topinka race was a prime example. Holding most any office is a means to fundraising, even for those who don't pay to play.

Until they get in to the heart of campaign finance reform and pension reform, creating new term limits will solve nothing.

Would the term and pension limits be for local, state, and federal, elected, hired, and appointed?

I think if you accept a position in a government job, the sallary should be set. No cost of living raises, no benefits increases. No voting on something that would benefit you or your associates, raises or otherwise.

School superintendents for example often make more than many plant managers, or elected officials, to manage one taxpayer funded operation. How many school districts are just in this state? And we wonder why education is failing, and coming up short on funding. Multiply that by most government bodies and agencies, management costs and pensions are eating much of the available budgets.

How can congress tell the UAW and others to cut their plans, and do nothing about the outlandish costs of their own. Most private health insurance has a million dollar limit of coverage. Government health care has no limits, co pay, or physician or facility limitations. If a private citizen had the care Kennedy has had to have the last several years, they would have to sell their boat, a house or two, or pay to keep from it. "

" I agree with the two postings of Harry Potter.

In addition, if pensions and future health insurance benefits were removed from congressional members, many would not run for reelection, or at least only once or twice.

I believe former members of congress can go on the House and Senate floor which helps them to be very good lobbyists. I also believe they have use of the House and Senate gym which allows them to maintain contact with current members of congress. Remove these two benefits and it would reduce their power as lobbyists in my opinion.

But as others have posted, we have the opportunity to not reelect anyone who runs. Unfortunately, many voters only don't want to reelect those whom they do not have the opportunity to vote for. Some have the attitude to kick everyone but their representative or senator out. I have probably errored and voted this way sometimes in the past.

A good news story would be one that sets out all the benefits and privilages that members of congress receive to include the junkets they take. It probably could not be done in one story, it would have to be a series or perhaps might have to be a book. "

" Never forget that the 2 term limit for the presidency was because they were furious that Roosevelt was elected for FOUR terms -- elected because the people respected his leadership.
They bitterly regretted it when Reagan came along for, tho I always voted against him, he was such a "regular guy" that he could probably have been elected for another term.
HOWEVER, he would have had to resign because of his Alzheimer's, which was already becoming evident by the end of his term. "